“That’s baseless conspiracy-mongering”, some might counter, contending that any anecdote I might dig up is simply the normal process of scientific quality control. “Welcome to the real world”, I respond, because this is something entirely new and disturbing. The deep and profound censorship occurring around autism science reaches depths that few casual observers can imagine.

I have proof.

By Mark F. Blaxill

There are no words to describe the findings of the General Medical Council (GMC). All I can say is that none of us should be surprised. The stakes had escalated far too high for the British medical establishment to countenance any other outcome. In the face of this parody of real justice, the only thing for the autism community to do now is stand by Andy Wakefield. Like him, we must not be intimidated; which is why I am proud to call Andy my friend. He is all of our friend.

We must also not forget two other fine men, John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch, men who have devoted their professional lives to healing the guts of sick children, and whose public reputations stand in tatters before the world, assaulted by the public health propaganda machine, victims of a modern day show trial. The GMC proceeding is a frightening and thoroughly modern form of tyranny. It makes you shudder to think what Stalin or McCarthy might have accomplished if their public relations had been more skillful and better organized.

The extremity of the GMC’s verdict--all three men guilty on all counts—lays bare any pretense that the British medical establishment cares one whit about the welfare of its patients. Let’s put in perspective the actions at issue here. No children were harmed and no parent or guardian has complained about the care these three men provided. In fact, the procedures involved were routine, the resulting treatments standard and the careful attention to gastrointestinal illness in autistic children has recently been endorsed by a consensus statement published in the journal Pediatrics (no friend of the autism community). Considered in this light, the GMC hearing process stands exposed for what it is. It was not about medical standards. It was not about evidence. It was not even civilized. It was, rather, a naked exercise in intimidation, a fateful moment of moral decision in which the medical industrial complex exposed its ruthless, repressive essence. They are a frightening bunch and their conduct here raises issues well beyond autism.

There are others who can and will speak to the particulars of the case: the accusations, the evidence, and the integrity of the witnesses for the prosecution (see HERE and HERE ). But it’s important to remember that this trial has never really been about the three doctors. If it were, it would never have consumed so many millions of dollars and thousands of hours over more than two years. The real goal of this proceeding, what I have called The Wakefield Inquisition (see HERE ) is to send a clear message to anyone--clinician or scientist--who dares step out of line like Wakefield did. And as parents and citizens, we all need to understand one thing: that message has been received loud and clear.

Over the last ten years I’ve had the privilege to interact with a wide range of scientists in several different fields. Many of them are wonderful people and first-class professionals. And in the course of those interactions I have observed common patterns. A few, like Jon Poling and Mark and David Geier, who have worked openly on behalf of our children, have suffered harsh public recriminations. But for every public example there are countless more private examples of intimidation, coercion and censorship. It’s like an iceberg; the vast majority of the scientific censorship occurring in autism takes place below the waterline, invisible to the broader public.

“That’s baseless conspiracy-mongering”, some might counter, contending that any anecdote I might dig up is simply the normal process of scientific quality control. “Welcome to the real world”, I respond, because this is something entirely new and disturbing. The deep and profound censorship occurring around autism science reaches depths that few casual observers can imagine.

I have proof. Over the last ten years I have collected a number of private examples--some via conversation others via email--of individual scientists who have felt the cold hand of censorship when dealing with autism. They comprise a modest sample (my interactions are necessarily episodic) of what I believe to be a pervasive pattern of suppression. But it’s an extensive sample nevertheless and in all instances the good-citizen scientist on the other side of the interaction has been troubled by it. In order to give some visibility to this mass of bad behavior lying below the waterline, I have decided to share a few of these examples here (I’ve observed many more than just this selection). In all cases, I have thoroughly disguised the identities (including name, age, gender, specialty and affiliation) and materially altered the words in order not to violate confidences and to protect the careers of the scientists involved.

But every single one of them is real.

Below the surface: scientific institutions behaving badly

Not every inquisition takes place in public. One researcher who has investigated the environmental causes of autism was brought up before a university panel on charges of misconduct. This charge was raised for blatantly political reasons by someone hostile to the environmental model of autism causation. The defense against the charges consumed months of this researcher’s time and has had career threatening implications. Here is an excerpt from that researcher’s discussion of this private proceeding.

Have been sidetracked/consumed with preparing my defense for the research misconduct proceedings instigated by X, but am looking forward to the opportunity to clear my name at least in this academic sphere. Unfortunately, the process has been less than transparent so that it is completely unclear as to how the charges came about (in acting to exclude X as a complainant, and thus the origin of these charges, the university failed to appreciate that a new committee not privy to what was provided might falsely assume that the original committee saw a problem), why I am being charged now, or even what specifically I am being charged with...but the noise from one individual has been clanging very hard looking for support for me to be fired.

Sanctions against non-compliant researchers need not reach the extreme outcome of a research misconduct action. Instead of overt punishment for past action, future career opportunities can be the vehicle for intimidation, and researchers who have published on a controversial autism issues can find themselves newly unwelcome in the grant review process. Since the National Institutes of Health (NIH) hold a virtual monopsony (“a sole or predominant buyer” in a particular market) on scientific research in the United State, NIH grant reviews are one prominent place where researchers can be effectively intimidated. One scientist, who authored a sensitive, previous publication, when asked to join in the effort to draft a review paper, demurred with the following explanation.

I have had two rejections of NIH grants in the last two weeks. This is most remarkable, in that the grants were not deemed good enough to even be scored. In my X years on the faculty, I have never had an unscored grant. Moreover, in one grant it is clear that there is a personal vendetta ongoing. This is not totally surprising but nonetheless disturbing. I am not ready to throw my career away, and I don't look at how Andy Wakefield has handled such problems as a good model for me. It is vital that the science of this problem get out, and this is where I want to focus my attention. Therefore, I have decided that I do not want my name on [this new review publication], for I don't need more persecution right now, and as good as the paper is (and I think it is extraordinary), it is not going to be a definitive scientific publication. I am enclosing a section I wrote-some of this is already included-feel free to use any of it.

If an intrepid researcher goes so far as to submit a paper for publication, that’s where the more overt forms of censorship can enter in, all in the guise of “peer review.” Admittedly, rejection at the point of peer review is a common part of science, but the autism problem is especially radioactive and is a place where I have seen the unmistakable cold hand of censorship take many forms: some unwelcome research can be headed off at the pass, with journal editors making clear that papers on certain autism topics are unwelcome and won’t even be sent out for review; or unwelcome papers can be sent to anonymous reviewers the editor knows to be hostile to the topic of environmental influences; in other cases, papers are rejected even in relatively progressive journals’ peer review process for reasons that have little to do with scientific merit. Given the nature of peer review, there is little effective recourse if one or two selected reviewers make critical comments that are simply wrong or biased. Here’s how one researcher described a recent rejection.

My paper was rejected today from the [Journal]. While some of the reviewers’ comments could have been addressed in a revision, most of them revealed the reviewers obvious bias and purposeful efforts to suppress this paper. Having gone over the comments, most of them are simply gibberish.

Another form of intimidation can come more directly from colleagues, in the social network of “mainstream autism researchers.” If a respected researcher takes the risk of making honest public comments about the possible role of environmental factors in autism, they can find themselves receiving “career advice” from their “friends” to keep their mouths shut. Here’s an example of one such communication.

I am concerned that you may be perceived as a strong supporter of the environmental influence on the developmental of autism …. I am afraid this attribution to you will tarnish your reputation and your credibility in the mainstream autism research community...This is the second time that what you had to say came back to me and astonished me (what you said was perceived as supporting the influence of toxins as causes of autism), even though I consider it likely that what you actually said was probably distorted. I hope you will accept this missive as the result of my concern for you as investigator and clinician… as your friend I truly feel impelled to give you the perspective of an outsider who fears that such statements are going to harm you.

Even when a paper from a brave and principled researcher succeeds in ushering useful research through the hurdles of peer review, the uniquely treacherous terrain in autism can (and almost always does) affect the drafting process, editing choices and the interpretation placed on evidence that might be viewed in multiple ways. In numerous cases I have observed (without any inside connection) that published evidence has been interpreted so as to downplay environmental factors. In a number of cases where I have been able to hear the inside story from researchers on what took place in the editing process, it’s clear how widespread biases and peer pressure can censor the interpretation of more open-minded members of a research team. Here’s one example from a researcher who was asked about how evidence that clearly could have been interpreted to implicate environmental factors was downplayed.

On the other hand, some of the 'downplay' of environmental factors probably reflected differences in emphasis between the lead author and myself, and even more, the pressures of the reviewers (which influenced the lead author), who thought the paper showed that environment played a negligible role. Like my [topic X] paper of last year, this paper went through innumerable reviews.

The collapse of civil discourse in a closed society

As we organize ourselves as an autism community to call attention to the injustice done by the GMC decision, we must make clear that Andy Wakefield is not alone. He, Simon Murch and John Walker-Smith are simply the most prominent and visible victims of an increasingly ruthless and doctrinaire campaign by the medical industrial complex to suppress a long overdue revolution in autism science. Autism can no longer be explained through the orthodox lens (as a rare, brain-centered, inherited psychiatric disorder), but those who would attempt to offer alternative explanations (how rising rates might reflect environmental influences that provoke whole body developmental injury in vulnerable children) are facing a rising tide of intimidation and censorship. The GMC verdict, that honest scientists like Andy Wakefield have “failed in their duty”, makes a mockery of the value of civil debate in an open society.

The medical industrial complex is closing ranks. It’s time for responsible citizens--health consumers and principled scientists alike--to raise their voices in opposition.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"As we organize ourselves as an autism community to call attention to the injustice done by the GMC decision, we must make clear that Andy Wakefield is not alone."
This is your quote Mr. Blaxill and it is the key. Age of Autism needs to campaign and organize the world autism community to come under one flag. We need to form a joint committee that speaks as one. I believe a conference should be held and some agreement should be made to perfect all responses from the autism community and have the response come from one powerful unified organization. Splinter groups are nothing more than that, pieces of a whole. The unified whole on the other hand is a front and a much more powerful force to reckon with.

Vaccine Causes Disease
A vaccine designed to protect infants against rotavirus, the leading cause of childhood diarrhea, can actually cause the disease in infants born with severe combined immunodeficiency, said experts at Baylor College of Medicine in a study that appears in the current edition of The New England Journal of Medicine.

The vaccine provides substantial benefit against rotaviral infection. Worldwide, it has prevented potentially deadly infections in millions of children. However, infants who are born lacking a protective immune system because of their genetic disorder can actually acquire the viral infection from the vaccine, the researchers said. The vaccine, given in three doses between 6 and 32 weeks of age, is live, but it has been weakened so that it does not present a threat of infection to children with normal immunity.

In this report, experts examined three cases in which infants developed rotavirus disease after receiving the live attenuated rotavirus vaccine. "All three infants (in the study) were vaccinated before they were diagnosed with severe combined immunodeficiency," said Dr. Paula Hertel, assistant professor of pediatrics-gastroenterology at BCM and Texas Children's Hospital, co-author of the study. "If the children could have been caught in a screening test done within days of birth, they may not have received the vaccine."

Expanded testing
While current routine newborn screening does test for many diseases, severe combined immune deficiency is not one of them.

Usually, experts recommend that children with severe combined immune deficiency not receive live vaccines. However, this vaccine must be given before most children are diagnosed with the immune disorder. The American College of Medical Genetics recently recommended that severe combined immunodeficiency be included as a part of the newborn screen.

"The disease in these infants was confined to the gastrointestinal tract, but in other cases there is potential that it could disseminate to other organs besides the intestines," said Dr. Stuart Abramson, associate professor of pediatrics in the section of allergy and immunology at BCM and Texas Children's Hospital and senior author of the study.

No immune system protection
Children with severe combined immunodeficiency lack protection provided by key components of the immune system – the T- and B-cells. As a result, these children have no protection against many infections that can become life-threatening. Fortunately, the disorder is rare, affecting between 1 in 50,000 to 100,000 live births.

Scientists analyzed the viral genetic material in stool specimens from the three children. This enabled them to determine that the rotavirus was of vaccine origin. This study led to a change in the vaccine exclusions listed on the vaccine manufacturer's label to include a history of severe combined immunodeficiency.

The children did not successfully fight the infection until they underwent bone marrow transplantation or enzyme replacement therapy that gave them a functioning immune system, said Abramson.

Some years back the immunization chief at the Minnesota Department of Health took part in a public debate with one of the autism community's prominent researchers, a highly credentialed doctor. However Minnesota Public Radio refused to give equal air time to interview that doctor, who verbally ran circles around MDH's top gun. I still have the videotape.

Even the MPR receptionist had to have been armed with a memo from MDH, because when I called he parroted information he would never have known otherwise. And because I knew the previous occupant of his rotating task chair, the censorship he employed was quite blatant.

You know what is driving me really really crazy is that I forward articles about this travesty to people I know (including close family members) and I get no response whatsoever. With rare exceptions, the only people who are aware of these terrible problems are those whose children have been obivously and seriously affected. Even most autism parents I know are oblivious.

Thank you, Mark, for publishing various researchers' comments. I am in deep mourning about the strong politics in autism research, which exposes itself as yet another arena in which the welfare of children is completely disregarded.

Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues are heroes to parents of children who are or have been in chronic pain. They are positive role models for every other researcher of integrity.

The story isn't over. I think we will see that these courageous men, who are walking through fire, will go down in history as the fearless leaders in science that they truly are. However, I pray it won't take so long that more children will have to suffer by going untreated.

I think power eventually makes you feel invincible. And though at times I feel Pharma is like this huge superpower that is unstopable - the truth is, Pharma is just a bunch of people. And those people who stand on a house of cards, who are so greedy, and power hungry ARE NOT in fact invincible. I feel the Wakefield trial shows just how desperate these greedy clowns are. If you go through that much to lie - you are getting scared. Greedy people get too big of egos and start to make mistakes.

Dr. Wakefield, if you are reading this, THANK YOU. It takes a true MAN to put yourself on the line like you have. We need more like you. God Bless you.

While there are no words to describe the GMC “findings,” there are words that help to describe the actions of Andrew Wakefield and John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch.

And those words came from historian Howard Zinn. Howard passed away on January 27, 2010 and this is from the Bill Moyers Journal last night.

“[Howard] appeared on the JOURNAL to tell us about a television special, THE PEOPLE SPEAK, based on his people's history. Here is a little of what we talked about:

MOYERS: What do you think these characters from the past that we will see on the screen, what do they have to say to us today?

HOWARD ZINN: Well, I think what they have to say to us today is think for yourself. Don't believe what the people up there tell you. Live your own life. Think your own ideas. And don't depend on saviors.

Traditional history creates passivity because it gives you the people at the top and it makes you think that all you have to do is go to the polls every four years and elect somebody who's going to do the trick for you and no. We want people to understand that that's not going to happen. People have to do it themselves. And so that's what we hope these readings will inspire.”

HOWARD ZINN: And so, when I see this , and I've seen this so many times, and each time I am moved because what it tells me is that just ordinary people, you know, people who are not famous, if they get together, if they persist, if they defy the authorities, they can defeat the largest corporation in the world.”

Two people can keep each other
sane, can give support, conviction,
love, massage, hope, sex.
Three people are a delegation,
a committee, a wedge. With four
you can play bridge and start
an organization. With six
you can rent a whole house,
eat pie for dinner with no
seconds, and hold a fundraising party.
A dozen make a demonstration.
A hundred fill a hall.
A thousand have solidarity and your own newsletter;
ten thousand, power and your own paper;
a hundred thousand, your own media;
ten million, your own country.

It goes on one at a time,
it starts when you care
to act, it starts when you do
it again after they said no,
it starts when you say We
and know who you mean, and each
day you mean one more.

At times like these I find hope in knowing that there is one who cannot be bribed and is more powerful than pharma, all the money in the world and all the politicians combined. Here are some of His comments which stand forever and will hold accountable all men whose days are numbered.

-- Deu 16:19 You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality, nor take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous.
Deu 24:17 "You shall not pervert justice due the stranger or the fatherless, nor take a widow's garment as a pledge.
Deu 27:19 'Cursed [is] the one who perverts the justice due the stranger, the fatherless, and widow.' "And all the people shall say, 'Amen!'
Deu 32:4 [He is] the Rock, His work [is] perfect; For all His ways [are] justice, A God of truth and without injustice; Righteous and upright [is] He.

1Sa 8:3 But his sons did not walk in his ways; they turned aside after dishonest gain, took bribes, and perverted justice.

ô¿ô He will judge Your people with righteousness, And Your poor with justice.
Psa 72:4 He will bring justice to the poor of the people; He will save the children of the needy, And will break in pieces the oppressor.
Psa 82:3 Defend the poor and fatherless; Do justice to the afflicted and needy.

Psa 111:7 The works of His hands [are] verity and justice; All His precepts [are] sure.
Psa 119:121 I have done justice and righteousness; Do not leave me to my oppressors.
Psa 119:149 Hear my voice according to Your lovingkindness; O LORD, revive me according to Your justice.
Psa 140:12 I know that the LORD will maintain The cause of the afflicted, [And] justice for the poor.

Maggie, if only people would understand...after a while you will get this...that yes, the world is after us, and it has been for decades, it's called the depopulation agenda. If not depopulation, at least control the masses. You can do this by aschewing the same old messages, in new formats...such as EPIDEMIC PIG FLU get your vaccine here, and "health reports" reported by the likes of Dr Oz, or other commercialized settings, (who really can't tell you the truth else they would be cancelled or not funded)...or sell you a bag of wares of drugs that only cover up symptoms and never cure disease (tell me what disease CDC has controlled or cured)...so yes...your on your own. And I am afraid, the likes of our autism community is too. For me, it has come a giant realization, that you must now fend for yourself, tell your stories as much as you can, advertise what you and your family has been through by trusting the white coats and move on and cure your kids on your own. Unfortunately, no researcher is going to tip their toes in this sand anymore. I was once told by a trusted autism researcher that they cannot do implicating studies at the university level, because it would upset their sponsers. He said it was the likes of ENRON environment....and if you are a whistleblower, good luck keeping a job or ever getting funding for implicating autism research. (vaccine research, viral, bacterial, immune function).

so. yes....the world is at our heels, the world has finally lost it's common sense and decency, the world is being chemically dumbed down castrated by vaccines, chemicals, pesticides, plastics, GMO MSG foods, and the like, and even at your most vulnerable moment, a birth of your child, your stem cells are robbed by immediate cord clamping....a boy here, a girl there, damaged for life, without you even knowing aobut it, as they coffer up thousands for your unbeknownst giving sanction non aware self. One only has to watch an episode of American Idol and see the SPECTRUM of damage that was inflicted.

I for one, am going to shout at the highest rooftops, that this world is out to get your kids, and if your going to be asleep at this switch, good luck with your children, if not yourself. Good luck having vim and vigor at eighty, when there's so much toxins infiltrating our homes, foods and water. Good luck lasting for your children....which is always our fondest wishes.

The travesty of our counciles, and our legal system has sunk to an all time low, and to be honest, our personal freedoms. Where is the persuit of happiness, my kids deserve?

"From Hell," the Johnny Depp movie is one. My trip to Salem, MA, to visit the witch trials museum is another. Shakespearean tragedies still another. And then the myriad history lessons of people in positions of power gone bad. And lastly given the media blitz of pro-vaccine messages, reports and commercials over the last couple of days, Orweil's 1984.

Chilling reality of where we are and the honest three over in jolly old England. If anything this should spur everyone to action like never before.

This reeks of so many times in history when truth and justice were hampered by truly evil people. What is evil?

adjective
1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life.
2. harmful; injurious: evil laws.
3. characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: to be fallen on evil days.
4. due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: an evil reputation.
5. marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: He is known for his evil disposition.
–noun
6. that which is evil; evil quality, intention, or conduct: to choose the lesser of two evils.
7. the force in nature that governs and gives rise to wickedness and sin.
8. the wicked or immoral part of someone or something: The evil in his nature has destroyed the good.
9. harm; mischief; misfortune: to wish one evil.
10. anything causing injury or harm: Tobacco is considered by some to be an evil.
11. a harmful aspect, effect, or consequence: the evils of alcohol.
12. a disease, as king's evil.

-"The very first case of autism recovered with biomedical treatment, but the doctors ignored it because they were so busy blaming parents. Now they don't blame parents for causing autism, they just blame them for trying to do anything about it."

-"Fasten your seat belts – it's going to be a bumpy ride."

Nothings changed except the medical industrial complex (PHRMA and its marionettes)have become more bold and ...more evil.

I believe that your brief, present an accurate picture of how thing are bad in the academic research world today.

What we are seeing is just the tip of the iceberg .In my particular case, witch involved the Canadian Autism research environment.

It is quite clear that the medical research agenda in the field of autism, is not directed towards improving the medical condition of our sick children, but rather is serving the interest of pharmaceutical industry.

Case in point is the 50 million funding by the Canadian federal authorities such as the Canadian Institute Health Research (CIHR) .

When we review the research finance over 10 years by this institution, it is self evident that for the most part it is "Deja Vue" .

But more serious that in the case of funded research in biological field, most where dead end research, that never resulted in any publish paper.

This situation is clearly made bluntly obvious, when take note that the most important publish research work that came out of western university, Dr. Eric MacFabe, was finance by private funding.

This situation is made more grievous, when one of the most important university medical research institution has been involved in covering up the unethical and unlawful action of a medical researcher involving over 200 autistic children.

It is notable to mention that this illicit research activity involving autistic children did result in actual publish work. At this time this university authorities are well aware situation and have been involve in a cover up of his activities.

So it should clearly understood, that these action by the leading Canadian research funding institution and medical research university that clearly highlight that the scientific agenda in autism research is clearly in the hands of pharmaceutical industry .

Until parents decide to fight to back control the scientific agenda in autism research , this situation will remain the same.

Erin, I am quite sure the New York Governor canceled his order for Health Care Workers required to get the H1N1 vaccination, but only after hearings before the New York State Assembly Committee convening for this critical issue.

For a remarkable, riveting testimony on this mandatory Swine Flu (H1N1) vaccination issue, Dr. Gary Null is shown testifying before the New York Health Committee on this revolt by health workers and nurses.

This is a MUST SEE, so I hope you paste it into your address line, and pull it up - and take heart.

P.S. It is always instructive to check your own family tree, if you have one. Ours goes back to 1500, and it was a real revelation to me, studying 500 years plus, which clearly charted the influence of the medical profession - not so much in preserving life, but in creating death.

Yes, there were three deaths (two typhoid and one unspecified meningitis) from what would be called immunable diseases, but absolutely none from diseases for which we have vaccines today. Between 1780 - 1890, vast numbers of babies, and a lot of mothers died of puerperal fever, and the next biggest killer was wars. Two died after being kicked by horses, and the rest lived long lives, particularly when you consider that they had to do so much more physical work than we do today.

I look at people dying in their 70's and 80's in the 1800, which is remarkable considering how hard their bodies were expected to perform in comparison to today.

This post may not seem to address the topic at hand, but it's important for people to review both their personal medical family history as well we medical history, in order to have a better understanding of where we've come from, to see more clearly, where we are going.

As Jim Carrey said so nicely 'We are not the problem. The problem is the problem'.

And the problem will only grow and grow. Will it reach a point of of U turn, or will we really end up with 1:1 rate and neurodiverse rulers of the world, as Tim said... Scary thought isn't it, to think that desire for world dominance could be behind their venom and vigour and defending of vaccines :)

So. The GMC has come full circle. For those who don't know the history of the GMC it was actually set up in order to censor and censure, the growing number of doctors of the day, speaking out against vaccination at the time.

It was the only tool they had to counter the numbers of discontented doctors, and oncologists who at the time, were openly discussing the role of vaccinations given by syringe, with a remarkable increase in later years, with internal cancer.

For anyone really interested in cancer, go right back to 1850 and track it's development. And don't fall for the standard bollocks line that the rise in cancer is due to a huge increase in longevity, because that too is bollocks, as you will see if you spend time reading the real data.

Many more babies died in those days, because doctors, who took over from female attendants, wouldn't listen to either Semmelweis, or Oliver Wendell Holmes and wash their hands. But if you survived childbirth, and some of the other horrific medical treatments of the day, and avoided doctors like the plague, you were likely to live almost as long as today.

It is remarkable to me, that in the medical world, there has never been something written about the history of cancer increase.

That appears to be well sealed up in the pond labelled "No Fishing".

But as I say, we come full circle. The GMC has fulfilled it's founding mandate, which was, where possible, to run any doctor questioning vaccines, out of town.

It would have been so easy for Drs. Wakefield, Murch, and Walker to have retracted, just like the other 10. They could have gone on with their careers and all this may have been forgotten about. But they didn't because they know what they saw and they had the strength and character to stand by sick children. History will redeem them and view the GMC and an Inquisition.

Meanwhile, our children, who have been turned away by GI doctors without examination will continue to be so. My son will continue to writhe on the floor every night while yelling, "My stomach is burning. It is on fire" and the local GI will remain unmoved to look at him. The message to the GI docs is clear, "Look into the bowels of these kids and what happened to Wakefield will happen to you." More selling out of children. Will it ever end?

John Gilmore, I disagree about a failed mandate for H1N1. As you know it was mandated for health care workers in NY State, and similar mandates also popped up in multiple other states as a condition of employment by hospitals. Putting someone's job at stake is a very effective way of silencing people. I only hope legal efforts will succeed.

I agree. Most parents are not stupid. They will have done the research, implemented biomed, chelation, etc. and will continue no matter what anyone says about Wakefield. The pathetic parents who are complete sheep will continue to sacrifice their children in order to be faithful followers to those like Offit and Alison Singer in order to make some sort of twisted point on their twisted blogs.

My partner and my sibling are both autism researchers, albeit in very different areas (neuroscience and education, respectively). This article does not surprise me, given what I have vicariously experienced through them. However, it does sicken me to my very core.

I have noticed, in real life, that more and more parents ask me how I have helped my child significantly improve in the areas of allergies, visual processing, focus, physical stamina, and bowel issues.

Now, I get much less "push-back" when I assert my belief about the causation of these issues - which I believe relates primarily to over-vaccination (and I always say - "I'm not a health care provider, this is just my opinion based on what I have seen with my child).

Thank you Carol for citing Dr. Needleman and his success. However, "Industry" while giving up lead pipes and other lead products easily switched over to non-toxic substitutes, and the sales of product went on seamlessly.

Nevertheless Dr. Needleman is/was a hero.

It is entirely different with the present catastrophic mistake (and terrible harm) of the 30-40 vaccine doses injected in babies, infants, young children by age 18 months by a Medical Industry completely addicted to its enormous power and reputation, and HUGE profits.

For today's Medical Industry to admit they have been mistaken, and disastrously so, would be like A-Bombs going off, nay, H-Bombs -- and an entire Culture of Allopathic Medicine, and the scores of $billions of profits per year, would be in ashes.

Of course, we the public would instantly experience enormous health benefits - and the virtual elimination of new autism cases and all the other terrible related conditions, including sudden infant death. Acknowledging the awful mistake, the present approximate several million on the autism spectrum desperately needing our society's help would be also instantly helped as much as humanly possible.

But, THEY (CDC et al.) don't care. What they do care about are their careers and power, objective truth be damned.

The Mayan calendar ends Dec. 21, 2012. Many speculate, based on that and the book of Revelations, that it may be the end of the world. The History channel has been airing "Nostradamus" programs which go into detail about the theory.

Thank you for this well written and argued indictment. Our opponents are huge and powerful. But the use of sheer power and oppression is a sign of a fundamental weakness. It means they know their ideas are wrong, inquiry is a real threat and that censorship and force are all they have left. I think that means we are having a profound effect.

And as evidence for that let me offer the fact that despite the immensely well funded efforts of the vaccine industry, legislators in the states are no longer willing to add any new vaccines to the state mandatory schedules. They failed spectacularly with HPV and H1N1 and I am unaware of any new mandates in the last three years.

Our efforts are similar to treating a tumor. First we have to stop the growth of the tumor and then you move on to shrinking it. In some ways I think we have stopped the growth. Leaders in the vaccine industry such as Anne Schuchat and Dr. Chan of the WHO are talking openly about the eroding confidence in the vaccine program. Schuchat recently described that confidence as "very, very fragile."

The completely expected decision yesterday isn't a victory for corporate medicine, it has become a festering sore that they can't get rid of. This is turning into a contemporary version of the Dreyfuss Affair, which was an attempt at the turn of the 20th century to frame a French army officer as a German spy. Evidence was fabricated, top military officers lied under oath and it eventually became a huge political scandal that threatened the French government. This show trial of the MMR 3 is headed in that direction. And we should help it get there.

The suppression of independent thought/research/treatment has not only occurred in the area of autism, it has also occurred in chronic Lyme disease. Which is probably not surprising, since the same people, "establishment" infectious disease doctors, are at the heart of both issues.

This is an issue of consumer rights and consumer protection. We need more people like Richard Blumenthal, Attorney General of CT, who investigated the Infectious Disease Society of America for anti-trust violations regarding its Lyme treatment guidelines:

The IDSA failed to conduct a conflicts of interest review for any of the panelists prior to their appointment to the 2006 Lyme disease guideline panel;

Subsequent disclosures demonstrate that several of the 2006 Lyme disease panelists had conflicts of interest;

The IDSA failed to follow its own procedures for appointing the 2006 panel chairman and members, enabling the chairman, who held a bias regarding the existence of chronic Lyme, to handpick a likeminded panel without scrutiny by or formal approval of the IDSA's oversight committee;

The IDSA's 2000 and 2006 Lyme disease panels refused to accept or meaningfully consider information regarding the existence of chronic Lyme disease, once removing a panelist from the 2000 panel who dissented from the group's position on chronic Lyme disease to achieve "consensus";

The IDSA blocked appointment of scientists and physicians with divergent views on chronic Lyme who sought to serve on the 2006 guidelines panel by informing them that the panel was fully staffed, even though it was later expanded;

The IDSA portrayed another medical association's Lyme disease guidelines as corroborating its own when it knew that the two panels shared several authors, including the chairmen of both groups, and were working on guidelines at the same time. In allowing its panelists to serve on both groups at the same time, IDSA violated its own conflicts of interest policy."

Throughout recorded history different cultures have spoken about the "end of days". The movie 2112 is about tidal waves and earthquakes ripping apart the planet from beneath our feet. Armegeddon theorists suggest nuclear disaster, or even the final battle of good vs. evil.

I suggest a much slower and insidious path to our demise. It is increasingly apparent that our species may be forced (by the ignorance and greed of those who should know better) to go through a self made evolution. 100 years from now the only survivors will be those humans, animals, plants and bugs that can survive and reproduce in an increasingly toxic world.

Who knows, may be the significance of December 21, 2112 is that will be when the autism rate reaches 1 in 1. Then, with the high functioning neurodiverse being the only ones left with the ability to run things, we could truly say:

"The unholy alliance between the public-health establishment and the for-profit medical establishment (including the pharmaceutical/vaccine industry) has grown to be so powerful that their influence permeates every sector of our society."

... and the inflated angry monster of extreme capitalism has started to eat its own tail. (with our children unfortunately being at the very bottom of that tail). This is what the brilliant Slavoj Zizek, and many less-vocal others, have been predicting for years.

The mountain of corruption and undue pharma and public health influence in media and medicine seems, right now, an impossible climb to accomplish. But as a positive thinker generally I HAVE to believe that we can make it possible. I will not resign myself to believing that immoral intimidation tacts will win out. The moral stance of "for the children only" is not lost and will not fall when we have such persistance for "rightness" in our corner. Yesterday I morned and was overwhemled with sadness and defeat, today I ask, what is it we need to do to change this atmosphere and how can I help....

I have come to realize that only God can offer real hope, faith in anything ruled by men is sure to disappoint and destroy. The government-medical-complex has cast us aside a long time ago. These turf-protecting arrogant vermin are all corrupt to the core.

2) never give another dime to the American Red Cross, American Cancer Association, Race for the Cure or any other "non-profit" which actually funds profits for pharma. Be very very selective in the organizations you give money to.

3) be a vocal supporter of health freedom legislation in the US. Find a homeopath, a naturopath, an acupuncturist - see these guys instead of an MD.

The best way to drive change in the organizations and institutions that no longer serve is to no longer be a slave to
them. Break free, find alternatives, and never look back - except to maybe witness the corrupt house of cards fall...

I don't think much has changed in England since the days when the King was rumored to have killed any messenger who dared or was foolish enough to bring him a message that displeased him.

Thankfully, the days of "beheading the messenger" in a public square are over .. replaced instead, by a more civilized, costly, subtle, unnecessarily cruel process, that required 148 days .. over 2 1/2 years .. 36 witnesses .. with 45 days of deliberation .. to punish Dr. Wakefield for displeasing the "powers that be".

It seems to me that ranks are being closed on biomed parents too. Lately we have seen a rush of stories on "untried" treatments being utilized by "desperate" parents. The implication, if not the direct statement, is that these parents are - at best - negligent, and at worst acting with reckless disregard for their children's safety.

I am praying that we never see - in a very public fashion - the removal of a child from a biomed home (unless there truly is abuse, neglect or abandonmnet - but then again, who defines those terms?).

Trine Tsouderos tip-toed around that issue in her hit piece profiling biomed in the context of a nasty divorce case (still angers me).

AoA the line in the sand has been drawn. I believe will need to start building trenches.One battle lost but the war continues for the sake of our kids.WE knew what was coming and we understand our enemies reasons.PURE UNADULTERATED GREED.I will support Dr.Wakefield,Usman,Geier`s and anybody else that will attempt to help our kids. I will stand my ground,I won`t back down.That`s a Tom Petty song It`s my personnel fight song I will be playing it all day.Dave

The unholy alliance between the public-health establishment and the for-profit medical establishment (including the pharmaceutical/vaccine industry) has grown to be so powerful that their influence permeates every sector of our society. My pessimistic side (growing all the time) tells me that we're going to see more and more of these witch hunts.

Obama said in the State of the Union Address that he wanted a government that he felt matched the public's decency.

I hate to say this, but from what I've seen in the six years that I've spent trying to bring this issue to the attention of people, I think he's got it.

On a more positive note, today for the first time ever I actually saw a person reading a flyer I'd left behind in a store. I'd left it on an yard furniture display as I came into the store, and as I left after I paid for my things, I saw this man sitting reading what I'd left there. Maybe it's wishful thinking but I think he looked interested, and he looked concerned. Wish I could go back in time, to the mall where the old man glanced at my flyer, then looked me in the eye while he crumbled it up and laughed. Actually probably best that I can't—this time I think rather than walking away, I might say something nasty to him.